If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

The Muscle and Brawn Forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Muscle and Brawn community stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Muscle Building and BodybuildingTopics related to muscle building, bodybuilding, including training and fullbody workouts. If you are looking for great advice on gaining muscle this forum is for you.

Well, my great Grandmother who died when she was in her upper 90's never EVER even knew what artificial sugar was. Probably never used anything but real butter either. She did not get overweight until she started getting really old and then she was just plump.

The fact is that sugar probably could be better for you. But in these days and times where people are WAY more sedentary, it is no longer the case.

The point though, is that sugar=natural doesn't mean sugar=good or sugar=bad. It's irrelevant.

The comparison of sugar (natural) to high-fructose corn syrup (artificial) --comparing them as artificial vs natural is typical non-sequitarian (is that a word?) logic. It's apples to oranges. Yeah...the argument is that high-fructose corn syrup is worse for you. The fact that it's not (or less) natural is irrelevant.

Some natural things are better for you. Some natural things are worse. Natural is just natural. It's not good or bad.

Even if one could take all natural food substances and compare them and quantify them against all artificial food substnaces and say that there were a higher majority of natural foods that were good for you, on a case by case basis it still has no meaning. A food is good for you if it improves your health and bad if it hurts it. And even that's a relative thing. Like the butter example. It's not believed that butter is better for you than margarine (at least Trans fat heavy margarine). Does that mean butters good for you? Or just better for you on a scale?

The point though, is that sugar=natural doesn't mean sugar=good or sugar=bad. It's irrelevant.

The comparison of sugar (natural) to high-fructose corn syrup (artificial) --comparing them as artificial vs natural is typical non-sequitarian (is that a word?) logic. It's apples to oranges. Yeah...the argument is that high-fructose corn syrup is worse for you. The fact that it's not (or less) natural is irrelevant.

Some natural things are better for you. Some natural things are worse. Natural is just natural. It's not good or bad.

Even if one could take all natural food substances and compare them and quantify them against all artificial food substnaces and say that there were a higher majority of natural foods that were good for you, on a case by case basis it still has no meaning. A food is good for you if it improves your health and bad if it hurts it. And even that's a relative thing. Like the butter example. It's not believed that butter is better for you than margarine (at least Trans fat heavy margarine). Does that mean butters good for you? Or just better for you on a scale?

Natural doesn't mean diddly in that regard.

Well there plenty of negative speculation against artificial sweeteners (although some may be based on studies), there's really nothing bad against sugar except for the quantity you take in.

If a person is a fat arse, then they probably want to avoid real sugar. But if they aren't and they aren't into trying to be 6-10% BF like some of us here, then why not sugar in moderation?

Running in any way (machine or free) dampers CNS output and inhibits strength progression. The force exerted on the body per step as you run or job is roughly equal to 1000lbs for someone around 200lbs. Add up the steps taken during your average cardio session and your looking at quite a bit of force.

As I said, this force dampens CNS output - you are telling your body you need to be lighter so you can be more efficient at running to put less stress on the CNS. When you lift you're telling your body to get heavier (hypertrophy) in order to adjust to the increasing weight. They counter each other which is where the problem occurs within your nervous system.

Elliptical is the lowest impact cardio you can do along with swimming. I'm not a fan of swimming for cardio so elliptical it is. I know how to preform HIIT, I was just curious about hand placement since I've never used an elliptical